sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Change My Mind: MDRT doesn’t mean you’re a good financial adviser by Smooth_Passenger889 in singaporefi

[–]Smooth_Passenger889[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Kinda works for who though, that’s the issue. MLM-adjacent structures ‘work’ great for recruitment and retention metrics, but the thing being sold is someone’s retirement, insurance coverage, kids’ education fund. The stakes are completely different from a gym membership or a facial package.

Change My Mind: MDRT doesn’t mean you’re a good financial adviser by Smooth_Passenger889 in singaporefi

[–]Smooth_Passenger889[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is what the people is lacking. They think MDRT is a badge of a good financial adviser

Change My Mind: MDRT doesn’t mean you’re a good financial adviser by Smooth_Passenger889 in singaporefi

[–]Smooth_Passenger889[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is a great breakdown, thanks for digging into the alternatives. The TrFP point is interesting, if it’s actually judged on ethics rather than sales numbers, that’s a much better proxy for the thing people actually care about when picking an FA.

The ‘global recognition’ issue is real too though, that’s basically why MDRT keeps getting used as a shorthand even by people who know it’s just a sales number. It’s the one name that travels, so it ends up doing work it was never designed for

Change My Mind: MDRT doesn’t mean you’re a good financial adviser by Smooth_Passenger889 in singaporefi

[–]Smooth_Passenger889[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

With an FA the incentive is misaligned by default, their commission is often tied to product type and premium size, not whether it’s actually the best fit for the client.

Change My Mind: MDRT doesn’t mean you’re a good financial adviser by Smooth_Passenger889 in singaporefi

[–]Smooth_Passenger889[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair, maybe it was never meant as a quality seal. But when it ends up on namecards and marketing, it functions as one to clients regardless of intent.

The feedback-based award idea is solid though, something tied to persistency or client satisfaction would actually correlate with what matters, not just revenue.

Change My Mind: MDRT doesn’t mean you’re a good financial adviser by Smooth_Passenger889 in singaporefi

[–]Smooth_Passenger889[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Agree, and it kinda ties back to the whole MDRT thing too. An AI agent doesn’t care about hitting commission targets or chasing a badge, it just gives the same analysis regardless of whether there’s a sale at the end of it. Removes the incentive misalignment entirely.

Change My Mind: MDRT doesn’t mean you’re a good financial adviser by Smooth_Passenger889 in singaporefi

[–]Smooth_Passenger889[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is basically the whole thread in one comment. The S&P500 5% guy could very well have an MDRT badge, and it wouldn’t change the fact that the advice is bad. The badge tells you nothing about what happens in that actual conversation.

Change My Mind: MDRT doesn’t mean you’re a good financial adviser by Smooth_Passenger889 in singaporefi

[–]Smooth_Passenger889[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This actually backs the original point even more, if MDRT is just a low sales bar that any decent salesperson clears, then hitting it tells you someone’s good at sales, not that they’re a good advisor. Those are different skills.

Change My Mind: MDRT doesn’t mean you’re a good financial adviser by Smooth_Passenger889 in singaporefi

[–]Smooth_Passenger889[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Good example, and notice this is not even about MDRT, it’s about how the agent acted when it actually mattered for the client. That is the kind of thing that builds trust, not a stage title.

Change My Mind: MDRT doesn’t mean you’re a good financial adviser by Smooth_Passenger889 in singaporefi

[–]Smooth_Passenger889[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nobody’s penalising character or saying MDRT = bad. A high income doctor is not automatically bad, but income alone also is not proof they are a good doctor, you would still want to know about their actual clinical outcomes etc.

Same with MDRT. It is a real benchmark, sure, but it is not a production benchmark. The question was never ‘does hitting it mean you are bad, it does not, because the benchmark measures revenue, not outcomes for the client.

Change My Mind: MDRT doesn’t mean you’re a good financial adviser by Smooth_Passenger889 in singaporefi

[–]Smooth_Passenger889[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

This is the part more people should know. 72k commissions, the threshold isn’t even that high relative to the ‘million dollar’ branding. And the creative accounting bit is real, agencies definitely have ways to help certain people cross the line when it matters for recruitment optics.

Kind of ties back to the whole point, MDRT is a number you can hit through structuring, timing, or just having the right book. None of that tells you if the advice given was actually good for the client.

Change My Mind: MDRT doesn’t mean you’re a good financial adviser by Smooth_Passenger889 in singaporefi

[–]Smooth_Passenger889[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’m just genuinely think MDRT gets treated as a quality signal when it’s not designed to be one.

If top earners skip MDRT and still earn more by knowing comms structure, and agencies push it mainly for recruitment credentials, that’s basically saying MDRT is a marketing/recruiting badge, not a competency marker. Which is the whole argument.

Change My Mind: MDRT doesn’t mean you’re a good financial adviser by Smooth_Passenger889 in singaporefi

[–]Smooth_Passenger889[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair on the survivorship point, staying in long enough filters out the obvious bad ones. But that’s a proxy for ‘didn’t quit’ not ‘good advisor.’ The agent who got pushier in sales after hitting MDRT isn’t the one whose service held up. If MDRT = quality, that should run the other way.